Secret Doc: Iran "breakout" in 11-13 years

anatta

100% recycled karma
Key restrictions on Iran's nuclear program imposed under an internationally negotiated deal will start to ease years before the 15-year accord expires, advancing Tehran's ability to build a bomb even before the end the pact, according to a document obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The document is the only text linked to last year's deal between Iran and six foreign powers that hasn't been made public, although U.S. officials say members of Congress have been able to see it. It was given to the AP by a diplomat whose work has focused on Iran's nuclear program for more than a decade, and its authenticity was confirmed by another diplomat who possesses the same document.

The diplomat who shared the document with the AP described it as an add-on agreement to the nuclear deal.
But while formally separate from that accord, he said that it was in effect an integral part of the deal and had been approved both by Iran and the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, the six powers that negotiated the deal with Tehran.

But while some of the constraints extend for 15 years, documents in the public domain are short on details of what happens with Iran's most proliferation-prone nuclear activity -- its uranium enrichment -- beyond the first 10 years of the agreement.

The document obtained by the AP fills in the gap. It says that as of January 2027 -- 11 years after the deal was implemented -- Iran can start replacing its mainstay centrifuges with thousands of advanced machines.

The U.S. says the Iran nuclear agreement is tailored to ensure that Iran would need at least 12 months to "break out" and make enough weapons grade uranium for at least one weapon.

But based on a comparison of outputs between the old and newer machines, if the enrichment rate doubles, that breakout time would be reduced to six months, or even less if the efficiency is more than double, a possibility the document allows for.

The document also allows Iran to greatly expand its work with centrifuges that are even more advanced, including large-scale testing in preparation for the deal's expiry 15 years after its implementation on Jan. 18.

Tehran will be positioned to quickly make enough highly enriched uranium to bring up its stockpile to a level that would allow it to make a bomb in half a year, should it choose to do so.

Iran insists it is not interested in nuclear weapons, and the pact is being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy
Agency

The deal provides Iran with sanctions relief in exchange for its nuclear constraints. But before going into recess, U.S. Congress last week approved a bill to impose new sanctions for Tehran's continuing development and testing of ballistic missiles, a program the White House says is meant to carry atomic warheads even if it is not part of the nuclear agreement
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/0...fts-iran-nuke-constraints-in-11-13-years.html
 
EXCLUSIVE: Iran conducts 4th missile test since signing nuke deal

Two days before the anniversary of the nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers, the Islamic Republic attempted to launch a new type of ballistic missile using North Korean technology, multiple intelligence officials tell Fox News.

The test, in violation of a UN resolution, failed shortly after liftoff when the missile exploded, sources said. The effort occurred on the evening of July 11-12 near the Iranian city of Saman, an hour west of Isfahan, where Iran has conducted similar ballistic missile tests in the past.

It would be at least the fourth time Iran has launched or attempted to launch a ballistic missile since the nuclear accord was signed on July 14, 2015.

Iran is barred from conducting ballistic missile tests for eight years under UN Resolution 2231, which went effect July 20, 2015, days after the nuclear accord was signed.

Iran is “called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology,” according to the text of the resolution.

The landmark nuclear deal between Iran and world powers does not include provisions preventing Iran from conducting ballistic missile tests.

Iran claims its ballistic missile tests are legitimate because they are not designed to carry a nuclear warhead. :rolleyes:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/0...4th-missile-test-since-signing-nuke-deal.html
 
Iran in Syria: flexing more, not less, military muscle

Just a little over a month ago, Secretary of State John Kerry told Congress that Iran, one of the major backers of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s regime, was moving its troops out of that country. Unfortunately, it isn’t so.

Instead, Iran is rotating forces in and out of Syria, bolstering pro-Assad militia units and likely beefing up Tehran’s ability to project military force abroad. These developments deserve close scrutiny rather than optimistic misinterpretation if we hope to keep a very bad situation in the Middle East from getting worse.

Tehran significantly escalated its involvement in Syria in October 2015 by creating a more aggressive model of support to pro-Assad forces. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) plugged brigade-sized cadre formations into an amalgam of Iraqi Shia militias, Hezbollah, and other pro-regime militias in order to integrate and lead these proxy forces

Moreover, Iran’s leadership is bringing new forces to the fight in Syria with the deployment of its conventional troops, the Artesh. A senior Iranian commander announced on April 4 the dispatch of troops from the elite 65th Special Forces Airborne Brigade, nicknamed the “Green Berets,” as well as unnamed other Artesh units, to serve in an “advisory” role for pro-regime forces.

Sending Artesh troops abroad marks a significant shift in their role within Iran’s military structure. The IRGC and the related Quds Force have historically been responsible for conducting Iran’s military and paramilitary operations abroad.

Recent statements by Artesh commanders indicate that they are determined to position the Artesh as capable of operating outside of Iran’s borders

The bigger picture here is that the Iranian military, both the IRGC and the Artesh, are deploying and sustaining ground forces in major combat operations far from Iran’s borders.

They are also building up capacity to do more of the same.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/04/07/iran-in-syria-flexing-more-not-less-military-muscle.html
 
Can you ask us how often we think about you again?

LOL

Nice. Remember he deleted that thread after he and "Leo" turned it into a thread all about Yurt? Right after I called them on it, the entire thread vanished.

I think I have caused him to delete at least a dozen threads so far.

You're welcome.
 
lol. You know Trump was asked about the nuclear deal one time. Among his responses was something like "Does it matter when they can develop their own? With the money we released to them they can buy one outright!"

Its correct too. Tehran doesnt need to develop nukes anymore. Obama gave them plenty of funds to buy. Its not like you need a lot.
 
Iran set to extend its influence in Iraq

The bet*ting is that Tehran will use its wind*fall billions from the lifting of sanc*tions to build up its growing proxy army in Iraq to contain the Islamic State (ISIS) and establish a heavily pro-Iranian regime in Baghdad to bolster its widening conflict with the long-dominant Sunnis for con*trol of the region.

Iran is already the decisive player in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and it will undoubtedly do all it can to in*crease its power and influence in a country – and an old enemy – that it has long wanted defanged and safely trussed up within its orbit.

In Iraq, it is the Iranian-controlled Shia militias of the Hashd al-Shaabi – Popular Mobilisation Units, or PMUs – that have the leading role in containing ISIS, while Baghdad seeks to rebuild the dysfunctional Iraqi Army so humiliated by the ji*hadists in the Mosul blitzkrieg in June 2014 to the point that it can’t mount a credible offensive.

Control of Iraq is the necessary condition for Iran projecting force in the Middle East, whereas lack of control or, worse, control of Iraq by another outside power, would constitute a direct threat,” the US global security consultancy Stratfor observed

Iran will seek to empower its Shia allies in Iraq, and its ability to meaningfully project influence beyond proxies in the region will depend on its suc*cess.

“The Saudis and Egyptians will empower Iraqi Sunnis in the region to counter Iran’s allies. They may also flirt with increasing support to Kurdish factions, in part to provide an Arab counterweight to Iran’s relatively close ties with Kurdish groups.”
Michael Knights, a seasoned Iraq expert with the Washington Insti*tute for Near East Policy, observed that Baghdad “stands at a political threshold, its army weakened and reliant on the PMUs that are deeply distrusted by the Sunni tribes.

Boosting funds to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) after the nuclear agreement is likely to “trigger an unprecedented inten*sification of influence-buying in Iraq”, he said.

This would be done through the vast network of agents and sympa*thizers covertly built up over the last two decades by such far-seeing Iranian leaders as Major-General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the IRGC’s elite al-Quds Force, the Guards’ foreign operations wing.

“Iran proxies will also seek to exploit their prominent war role to dominate Iraq’s provincial elec*tions in 2017 and parliamentary election in 2018,” Knights noted. “If successful, they could overturn the political order, surpassing Shia moderates and technocrats such as Prime Minister al-Abadi.”


“An infusion of cash into Iran’s influence-building efforts – includ*ing subsidised electricity to Iraq border provinces, influence-ped*dling among Shia bureaucrats and leaders, and pilgrimage-related in*vestments – could be the nail in the coffin for moderates seeking to re*tain Iraq’s strategic independence in the face of already-severe Iranian pressure,”
Knights said.

http://www.themiddleeastmagazine.co.../08/iran-set-to-extend-its-influence-in-iraq/
 
Tehran doesnt need to develop nukes anymore. Obama gave them plenty of funds to buy. Its not like you need a lot.

He did?

How much did he give them to buy nuclear weapons with? Who's selling them? How much are they charging? :)
 
US sanctions 3 alleged senior al-Qaeda leaders based in Iran

so there you go. The whole nuke deal maybe delayed breakout by a decade -but the windfall billions from the lifting of sanctions -
has greatly financed. Iran's expansionism.

Those ballistic missile tests are against the UN nuke deal ( unless you believe ICBM's are really not for nukes?)

Iran has lately been playin footsie with AQ too - they are STILL sponcers of state terrorism, whatever the State dept's-
current list shows, or doesn't show.

Whatever you think of SA -think of SA as a counterbalance to Iran; after all Iran is the expansive power here
( Damascus/Beirut/Baghdad -and Sana'a too).
++
US sanctions 3 alleged senior al-Qaeda leaders based in Iran
The US Treasury has announced sanctions on three Iran-based men alleged to be senior al-Qaeda members involved in moving funds and weapons around the Middle East.
Treasury remains committed to targeting al-Qaeda's terrorist activity and denying al-Qaeda and its critical support networks access to the international financial system," Adam Szubin, acting under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said in a statement.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/u...-senior-al-qaeda-leaders-based-iran-335368007
 
T⃥h⃥e⃥ ⃥w⃥h⃥o⃥l⃥e⃥n⃥u⃥k⃥e⃥ ⃥d⃥e⃥a⃥l⃥m⃥a⃥y⃥b⃥e⃥ ⃥d⃥e⃥l⃥a⃥y⃥e⃥d⃥ ⃥b⃥r⃥e⃥a⃥k⃥o⃥u⃥t⃥ ⃥b⃥y⃥ ⃥a⃥ ⃥d⃥e⃥c⃥a⃥d⃥e⃥

should read "a couple years" -since breakout in now closer to a decade rather then 15 years.
 
lol. You know Trump was asked about the nuclear deal one time. Among his responses was something like "Does it matter when they can develop their own? With the money we released to them they can buy one outright!"

Its correct too. Tehran doesnt need to develop nukes anymore. Obama gave them plenty of funds to buy. Its not like you need a lot.
incorrect. Transfer of nuclear weapons still violates international law ( IAEA protocols).
It can lead to sanction, and the last thing Iran wants is sanctions.

Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan's nuke program; and no doubt has a chit in for an "off the shelf" self contained system whenever it wants.
But it would still violate IAEA .
Depending on what Iran does, It might just buy them anyhow - that might be what you are thinking of
 
incorrect. Transfer of nuclear weapons still violates international law ( IAEA protocols).
It can lead to sanction, and the last thing Iran wants is sanctions.

Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan's nuke program; and no doubt has a chit in for an "off the shelf" self contained system whenever it wants.
But it would still violate IAEA .
Depending on what Iran does, It might just buy them anyhow - that might be what you are thinking of

lol. You think these countries give a damn what the IAEA thinks?
 
Non-Proliferation Treaty violations are both diplomatic and economic..
Did you see how far Iran went to get out of UN sanctions? they are biting

you know these organizations are not independent particularly the UN lol. Obama just released them from sanctions as long as they promised to be a good boy. You know how bad he looks if they slam them back in? You want the democrats to start demanding that we withdraw from the UN?

Iran could have a truck with a nuclear weapon delivered to it and it would be ok.

You know how to think critically. Think in terms of realpolitik.
 
you know these organizations are not independent particularly the UN lol. Obama just released them from sanctions as long as they promised to be a good boy. You know how bad he looks if they slam them back in? You want the democrats to start demanding that we withdraw from the UN?

Iran could have a truck with a nuclear weapon delivered to it and it would be ok.

You know how to think critically. Think in terms of realpolitik.
I completely agree "snap back" sanctions are a fairy tale - soothing Obama blandishments -
to lull Congress into no vetoing the executive agreement.
That ship has already sailed with international Iran business deals pending

Interesting thing about the nuke deal: it's NOT a treaty (even though it looks and walks like a treaty)
it's an International Executive Agreement -the difference is that the Congress would have to OVERRIDE his signature by a 2/3 +1 vote-
instead of 2/3 to pass it
 
I completely agree "snap back" sanctions are a fairy tale - soothing Obama blandishments -
to lull Congress into no vetoing the executive agreement.
That ship has already sailed with international Iran business deals pending

Interesting thing about the nuke deal: it's NOT a treaty (even though it looks and walks like a treaty)
it's an International Executive Agreement -the difference is that the Congress would have to OVERRIDE his signature by a 2/3 +1 vote-
instead of 2/3 to pass it

There you go. Seriously with the billions released to them they dont need to develop a nuclear weapon anymore. I mean it would be nice for them i guess and they could start selling too but im fairly sure they already bought one.
 
There you go. Seriously with the billions released to them they dont need to develop a nuclear weapon anymore. I mean it would be nice for them i guess and they could start selling too but im fairly sure they already bought one.
maybe.
Their hegemony ( see the various pieces I linked to the OP) show Iran is already tromping around the region with impunity.

Nukes would be a typical Ayatollah type move; but they may in fact not even be needed.
 
Back
Top